Neil Gorsuch Confirmation Process Discussion (confirmed 54-45)

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

The confirmation hearing for Neil Gorsuch will begin on the 20th at 11 AM EST. The confirmation hearing will be held in three stages.

1. Gorsuch will be introduced by Sen. Michael Bennet (D), Sen. Cory Gardner (R), and Former Solicitor General Neal Katyal (D). (While these will be supportive messages, neither senator enters into any sort of obligation to vote for the nominee as a result of introducing him.) Next, all 20 senators on the judiciary committee will give 10-minute opening remarks (yes, all 20 of them). Gorsuch will also give his opening remarks at this stage. The whole affair will take the entirety of Monday.

2. Over the course of Tuesday and potentially part of Wednesday, Gorsuch will answer questions from all senators on the committee. Chairman Grassley will go first, followed by Ranking Member Feinstein. After that, the questioning will alternate by party (so a Democrat, then a Republican, then a Democrat, and so on), going from the most senior to the least senior members of the committee. Because the republicans have an 11-9 majority on the committee, the last two questioners will both be republicans (Tillis and Kennedy). Each senator will have 30 minutes to question the nominee. After everyone is done, Grassley may elect to allow a second round of questioning, presumably with a shorter per-senator time limit.

3. Starting at some point on Wednesday, continuing into Thursday, and potentially dragging into Friday, will be four sets of "panels", who will express their views on Gorsuch and answer questions. These are as follows:

Panel 1
American Bar Association - Supporting Gorsuch

Nancy Scott Deagan
Shannon Edwards

Panel 2

Supporting Gorsuch:

Deanall Reece Tacha (R), retired federal judge (Reagan Appointee)
Robert Harlan Henry (D), retired federal judge (Clinton Appointee)
John L. Kane, senior federal judge (Carter Appointee)
Leah Bressack, former law clerk

Opposing Gorsuch:

Elisa Massimino (D), CEO of Human Rights First
Jameel Jaffer (D), Executive Director of Knight First Amendment Institute
Jeff Perkins
Guerino J. Calemine, III, General Counsel, Communications Workers of America

Panel 3

Supporting Gorsuch:

Jeff Lamken, Partner, MoloLamken
Lawrence Solum, Law Professor, Georgetown University
Jonathan Turley, (L), Law Professor, George Washington University
Karen Harned (R), Executive Director, National Federation of Independent Business Small Business Legal Center

Opposing Gorsuch:

Heather McGhee (D), President of Demos
Fatima Goss Graves (D), Senior VP, National Women's Law Center
Pat Gallagher, Director, Environmental Law Program, Sierra Club
Eve Hill, Partner, Goldstein Levy

Panel 4

Supporting Gorsuch:

Peter Kirsanow (R), Commissioner, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights
Alice Fisher, Partner, Latham & Watkins (Served as an Assistant Attorney General during Dubya's 2nd term)
Hannah Clayson Smith (R), Senior Counsel, Becket
Tim Myer, former law clerk
Jamil Jaffer (R), former law clerk

Opposing Gorsuch:

Kirsten Clarke, CEO of Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights under law
Sarah Warbelow (D), Legal Director, Human Rights Campaign
Amy Hagstrom Miller (D), CEO of Whole Woman's Health
William Marshall, Professor, University of North Carolina
Sandy Phillips

--------------------------------

The hearing proceedings will be covered live on one of the C-SPAN stations (most likely C-SPAN 3), and may be covered on other networks as well.

*Many of the political party affiliations listed above are educated guesses. Those who I did not list a party affiliation for are those where I was not able to find enough information to even make an educated guess.*

http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/445871/gorsuch-hearing-logistics
https://jonathanturley.org/2017/03/18/gorsuch-hearing-to-start-monday-turley-to-testify-on-thursday/comment-page-1/
https://www.yahoo.com/news/expect-neil-gorsuch-confirmation-hearings-112005688--politics.html

-----------------------------------

Following the hearing, the committee will vote on whether they will give a favorable or unfavorable report on Gorsuch to the full senate. Even if the report is unfavorable, McConnell may still elect to hold a vote on Gorsuch. Unless filibuster rules are changed, Gorsuch needs the support of 60 senators to be confirmed.

Discuss all proceedings here.

livestream of hearing that doesn't require existing cable subscription: http://www.politico.com/livestream-2-watch-live-streaming

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

I cannot believe we're actually going to give him the time of day. There should be precisely zero Democrats at these hearings and zero Democratic votes in favor of him. Never thought I'd support the #WeWillReplaceYou movement, but it's time to start purging pro-Trump Democrats.

As shown with some of the cabinet nominations, Democrats not showing up to committee proceedings doesn't stop the proceedings from happening. At least if they show up they can make their argument and it's (theoretically) possible to turn republicans against Gorsuch. If they simply abandon the proceedings, that's effectively surrendering. Plus, it might make sense for them to vote to approve this nominee, so the filibuster stays around to be used against a replacement for Ginsburg or Kennedy in a year or two.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Michael Bennet was already the kind of trash that needs to taken to the curb before this.

Thankfully, Democratic party leadership does not consider your input when making decisions.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Currently Durbin is giving some generic #hottakes in his opening statement.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

livestream of hearing that doesn't require existing cable subscription: http://www.politico.com/livestream-2-watch-live-streaming

Also adding this to OP.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

I hope that all my fellow Democrats on here realize that they sound a whole lot like babies crying about how unfair it all is. Trust me, I literally had to get up and tell anyone I could when I saw Trump's favorables at -21 because I was so happy, but I have a lot less tolerance for this kind of "well they did it first" behavior. I mean, really. After complaining we did (and rightfully so) that Republicans held up the Supreme Court for almost a year, our reaction is going to be doing the same thing for the next four? Please. I thought the quote we were going with was "When they go low, we go high." I think that showing voters that the Democratic party is the party of the people, who go to meetings and vote in the interests of the public is a whole lot better strategy that showing that we are the minority, obstructionist party in every government branch.

No one follows "go low, go high" anymore.

Whitehouse is speaking now and is echoing my own concerns about Gorsuch - that he may be too friendly to corporations and be inappropriately aggressive in striking down regulations from the bench.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Graham clearly wants to jump in a time machine to the 90s.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Gorsuch is giving his opening remarks now.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

With stage 1 (described in the OP) now complete, the committee has adjourned until tomorrow morning, when the next stage (Senators questioning Gorsuch) will begin.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

The hearing resumes at 9:30 AM EST tomorrow.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Hearing is resuming.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Grassley is throwing some softballs at Gorsuch

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Progress Update: Sasse is on now. Following him will be, in order - Coons, Flake, Blumenthal, Crapo, Hirono, Tillis, Kennedy. So still over three hours in the first round.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Flake is asking Gorsuch questions about his hobbies, LOL

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

I haven't heard every moment of the hearing, but I like most of what I've heard. Gorsuch doesn't seem to be a radical precedent-striker, regulation-assassinator, or power-grabber, nor does he seem to be tied to Trump. However, that Truck Driver case bothers me.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Day two of the hearing has concluded. Tomorrow will be another round of questioning by senators, with a 20 minute per senator time limit, for nearly seven hours of questions total (not counting breaks). The start time is again 9:30 AM EST.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Hearing is resuming.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

^ The Senate probably won't even consider that in their decision, hut they definitely should consider it.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

After watching what I could of the hearing, reading highlights from what I missed, and considering the SCOTUS decision mentioned above, I feel that is best that the senate does not confirm Mr. Gorsuch, and also that he is not approved at the cloture or committee stages, for the following reasons:

- He has to be pushed to even give implied support for Lawrence v. Texas, Brown v. Board, Griswold v. Connecticut and Eisenstadt v. Baird.

- He is clearly insufficiently committed to at least seriously considering overturning Roe v. Wade, and even implied cautious support for it.

- The Truck Driver Case

- Being against a unanimous supreme court ruling on the disability-related case mentioned above

This is not about Trump, or Garland. I did not even consider either factor, and barely paid attention to pre-hearing events.

------------------

Let's bring on an actual moderate-conservative. My suggestion is Brian Sandoval.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

- He has to be pushed to even give implied support for Griswold v. Connecticut and Eisenstadt v. Baird.

- He is clearly insufficiently committed to at least seriously considering overturning Roe v. Wade, and even implied cautious support for it.

so you want him to strongly oppose Roe but also strongly support the cases that provided Roe's legal underpinning?

More than anything, I just want some consistency here - cautiously Supporting roe but being skeptical of cases that allow contraception makes little sense. But yes, I would prefer a judge who supports contraception (Grizwold/Baird), but opposes Abortion (roe).

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

The final stage, the panels, is now in progress. First one (American Bar) on now.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Second Panel starting now.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Now questioning third panel

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Fourth and Final Panel currently on

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Sickening. Attempting to confirm a nominee while there is a Presidential campaign, as the President already filed his re-election campaign, goes against everything that the Republicans stood for last year. I say let's wait four years and let the American people, not the electoral college decide our next Supreme Court Justice!

If the senate doesn't want Gorsuch, they should show it properly - by actually voting him down. As sickening as it was to see a stellar nominee get ignored last year, two wrongs never make a right.